Bruckheimer said:“Here’s the problem,” Bruckheimer began. “To really make a good game, it really takes a long time. By the time you greenlight a movie, it’s a year to a year-and-a-half until it’s out. That’s too short a period for a video game to be made. It’s a three-year process to get a really good game made, and that’s where they fail.”
"What the studios do is have this business model where they know they’ll sell X amount of games on that opening couple of weeks, and a lot of them do that, rather than take their time and create a wonderful game.”
Then there are the constraints imposed by the film itself—does it follow the same narrative? What assets can you use? How much access do you have? I know one writer who worked on an adaptation of a film story into games who was only allowed one look at the script—he could read it through in a room, one time, but couldn’t have a copy, or even take notes or pictures.
GG what do you mean all PoP games are alike. They just had a brand new version.
On the other hand it might be best to let the prince die a quiet death and do an XBLA/Steam HD remake of the originals and let that be it.
 |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The optimist proclaims we live in the best of all possible worlds while the pessimist fears this is true. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ |
SteelAttack said:There has been only one outstanding PoP game in 3d: Sands of Time. Anything else coming afterwards has ranged between mediocre to laughable.It is, however, a franchise, one that will gain even more notoriety on the mainstream with the upcoming film, and because of that, there are certain expectations to fulfill and that includes regular release of PoP titles, which very much likely will see an even more pronounced decrease in quality until the franchise is deemed no longer profitable, or a true reboot appears.Make no mistake, this is a movie tie-in, and suffers from the very same problems that plague tie-ins, besides the obvious drawbacks that an anachronic game design poses by itself.Check out this GSW article. Even Jerry fucking Bruckheimer understands how licensed games should be handled.Bruckheimer said:
“Here’s the problem,” Bruckheimer began. “To really make a good game, it really takes a long time. By the time you greenlight a movie, it’s a year to a year-and-a-half until it’s out. That’s too short a period for a video game to be made. It’s a three-year process to get a really good game made, and that’s where they fail.”
"What the studios do is have this business model where they know they’ll sell X amount of games on that opening couple of weeks, and a lot of them do that, rather than take their time and create a wonderful game.”
Then there are the constraints imposed by the film itself—does it follow the same narrative? What assets can you use? How much access do you have? I know one writer who worked on an adaptation of a film story into games who was only allowed one look at the script—he could read it through in a room, one time, but couldn’t have a copy, or even take notes or pictures.
Bruckheimer knows more about games than games publishers.
Dvader said:
GG what do you mean all PoP games are alike. They just had a brand new version.
The gameplay is so rigidly structured. The Persia part limits the environment, but the gameplay structure is so rigid you inevitably end up doing the same thing you've done before in each game, in similarly structured environments. It's gotten to the point where you might as well just replay Sands of Time, because everything after has been broadly similar and the quality has varied too.
Agnates and Selbie. Got to agree with the sandbox or level design. My first idea was do a prince of persia game that was like GTA in an ancient and populated city, where you rode horses or donkeys or camels and could freely platform about the city doing quests. Would that be too much like Assasins Creed? I don't know because I haven't played one yet.
The other idea is to totally freak out in level design. Have the prince trapped in a dream or something where you can literally do anything with the design and then at the end he breaks out from the dream.
Of course he would have to be king of persia to do that, but then the pun doesn't work
The Forgotten Sands reviews:
Eurogamer:
"What we get here feels like a place-holder, a nostalgic diversion that exists so there's product on the shelves to coincide with the movie, rather than something driven by a flash of inspiration as to where the series could go next. For all its basic surface pleasures, The Forgotten Sands seems content to indulge our fondness for the past without ever giving us reason to be excited about the future."
Gamecentral:
"This seems to be a game created to fulfil a corporate obligation rather than genuinely take the series forward. The level design, with its rectangular rooms and nonsensical architecture, hasn't moved on at all since the PS2. At least the reboot tried to do something different, this merely tries to recapture past glories and as a result leaves the franchise feeling more irrelevant than ever."
Here it is, the Prince of Persia games, from the Sands of Time up to the Forgotten Sands is a game with the same structure. That's 5 games now that all broadly use the same design template. Many other games do this but the Prince of Persia gameplay is very rigid and structured to begin with.
You can't freeform your way about levels, you are more like a monkey jumping through the exact hoops the developers want you too.
Now, it feels to me like a game too far. With the Forgotten Sands receiving fair to medicore reviews. Can you see how this series could evolve? Or should they lay the Prince down, into the royal tomb?
Ubisoft Planning More Prince of Persia